> On 20 Apr 2016, at 15:56, Tino Heth <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> The question is whether the downside to variadic parameters is really enough >> to justify _removing_ an existing language feature. >> >> The burden of justification should be on those people wanting to change the >> language, not on those wanting to maintain the status quo and “I don’t like >> it” or “I think it makes code a tiny bit less readable” is not sufficient >> justification, in my opinion because you already have the option not to use >> the feature. > Afaics, this isn't true: > Increment/decrement operators, currying, tuple splat and even the C-style for > loop have already been deprecated, and although I would have preferred to > keep some of those constructs, I think it is good how progressive Swift is > pushed forward ("would we add this feature now if it wasn't already there?”).
How do these examples show that the burden of justification should not be on those people making the change? I have not claimed that language features should never be removed, only that removal needs some sort of real justification. I don’t think "would we add this feature now if it wasn't already there?” is sufficient anymore, if it ever was. The global Swift code base is growing day by day and each time you remove a feature, you piss somebody off. If the perception of the Swift community is that we keep taking their toys away, it will impede the growth in Swift’s popularity. > > The value of variadic functions is imho less than the possibility to omit > "()" in procedure calls, and afair, there have been several posts that > illustrate the complications of this feature. I don’t think “it’s a bit complicated” is necessarily good justification for removing a feature. _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
